The Campaign Against Urban Sprawl in Essex group claims villages including Alresford, Thorrington, Great Bentley, Weeley and Thorpe should be expanded in place of West Tey development

The Campaign Against Urban Sprawl in Essex, which includes planning experts, economists and transport consultants, says the likes of Alresford, Thorrington, Great Bentley, Weeley and Thorpe should be expanded.

The Coggeshall-based group says building houses to the east of Colchester would be better for the local economy than a new village between Marks Tey and Braintree.

Alan Stones, an architect and urban designer, says the housing developments would be a maximum of ten minutes walk from the nearest train station.

He said: “The existing infrastructure has the capacity to provide a 15-minute local service and a through-service to the mainline every 30 minutes.

“West Tey would not benefit the local economy. It would promote car-use in the direction of Stansted and London.

“Its main jusitification is to promote improvement to the A120 when the focus should be to improve regional road capacity.”

The proposal was unveiled at a conference the campaign group organised at the Barn Brasserie in Great Tey, attended by representatives from Braintree Council and Colchester Council Colchester MP Will Quince and Harwich and North Essex MP Bernard Jenkin.

Tim Pharoah, a transport and urban planning consultant and a member of Cause, said new homes have to be built where there is infrastructure already in place.

He said: “The prospect of new stations as well as more frequent train services and high speed rail is a non-starter.

“Focusing growth on the mainline means people are more likely to be related to London and commuting back into the capital.

“It should be more of an objective to benefit the economy of Colchester.

“The Clacton line is an altogether different proposal. There’s a lot of potential for those lines to handle a lot more passengers.”

Cause insists it is not a “not in my back yard” pressure group.

It is proposing a “small settlement” in Marks Tey, to link with the Sudbury railway line.

Tom Foster, chairman of the campaign group, said: “We are happy to be called Slimby not Nimby - something logical in my back yard.

“We want to see development which supports our towns rather than building dramatic new towns.”

THE Campaign Against Urban Sprawl in Essex has been branded a “Nimby” group for suggesting building Colchester’s and Braintree’s housing allocation in Tendring.

Neil Stock, Tendring Council leader and chairman of the Local Plan committee, criticised the group for inviting local MPs to its meeting rather than inviting councillors who would be making decisions on the Local Plan.

The Tory councillor said:“I would challenge them over the name of the group, the Campaign Against Urban Sprawl in Essex.

“Most people are happier with the gradual expansion of urban areas rather than building large new towns in a field.

“They seem to be against urban sprawl in Marks Tey, but want it in Clacton and Tendring.

“It really would be sprawling if it meandered along the railway line.

“It is always interesting to hear other groups and organisations against large scale housing in their own back yard, but this is nimbyism.

“I fully respect that, but we are already going to have to meet the housing needs of our residents.

“If you build housing in Tendring that will not satisfy the needs of people in the west of Colchester, where there is demand for thousands of homes.

“It just doesn’t stack up.”

Mr Stock said he was also in favour of plans to upgrade the A120 in the Marks Tey area as part of development plans in the Colchester and Braintree area, which he said would “open up the whole of north Essex”.

Colchester Council’s leader says a “garden village” would have a better chance of delivering infrastructure.

Lib Dem Paul Smith said expanding smaller towns and villages along the Colchester to Clacton railway line could put strain on Colchester’s resources.

He said: “If you build relatively small extensions to all those places you will not build enough homes to have to build another secondary school, and you might not even have enough for a primary school.

“There would be a similar situation with doctor’s surgeries. I imagine if you lived in Alresford and could not find a place in the local surgery then you might try and go to Wivenhoe or if not there then event St John’s, St Anne’s or Greenstead.

“The danger of piecemeal developments of these places would be that no development is big enough to deliver infrastructure.

“What we have seen in the past is infrastructure playing catch up to housing.

“The best way of doing it could be to have a new development somewhere and the infrastructure can be built first and then the homes afterwards.”